GOP using Benghazi to smear

By Donna Brazile, CNN Contributor

Updated 6:50 AM ET, Thu May 16, 2013

Photos: Benghazi attack hearing8 photos

Benghazi attack hearing – Gregory Hicks, the former deputy chief of mission in Libya, arrives for a House committee hearing on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, May 8. State Department employees testified about the terror attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11, 2012. U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed. View photos of the attack.

Hide Caption

1 of 8

Photos: Benghazi attack hearing8 photos

Benghazi attack hearing – From left, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Counterterrorism Mark Thompson; Hicks; and Eric Nordstrom, a diplomatic security officer and former regional security officer in Libya, are sworn in before the hearing. The three are testifying at the hearing investigating into whether the State Department misled the public about the assault.

Hide Caption

2 of 8

Photos: Benghazi attack hearing8 photos

Benghazi attack hearing – Nordstrom testifies on May 8. He said in written testimony it was "inexplicable" that a followup internal State Department review ignored "the role senior department leadership played before, during, and after" the attack.

Hide Caption

3 of 8

Photos: Benghazi attack hearing8 photos

Benghazi attack hearing – Dorothy Narvaez-Woods, center, listens as Hicks testifies. She is the widow of Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods, who was killed in the attack.

Benghazi attack hearing – Nordstrom listens to Hicks testify. Hicks has been praised by Republicans as a "whistleblower." He has expressed concern that more could have been done by the military to protect those being attacked last year at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.

Hide Caption

6 of 8

Photos: Benghazi attack hearing8 photos

Benghazi attack hearing – Thompson testifies on May 8. He is the State Department's acting deputy assistant secretary for counterterrorism.

Hide Caption

7 of 8

Photos: Benghazi attack hearing8 photos

Benghazi attack hearing – Ray Smith, left, and Pat Smith listen as Thompson testifies. Their son Sean was one of the four Americans killed in the terror attack.

For some Republicans, 2016 is 1992: Hating Hillary Clinton is chic again. Only more so, since the former secretary of state is also the partner of and potential successor to the last two Democratic presidents—Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

Some of us believe, with good reasons, that the Republicans are "mad-dogging" Hillary Clinton with the Benghazi hearing to damage not only her presidential prospects, but also to damage President Obama's credibility.

Polls show Obama is trusted more than his Washington opponents, especially on the economy. So, to defeat his economic agenda and substitute their own, which has already lost on logic, they've decided to undermine Obama's credibility and authority.

Donna Brazile

The Benghazi hearing, which House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, orchestrated and planned for months, is a classic "killing two birds with one stone" scenario for Republicans. Or maybe three: They see an opportunity to smear Obama, sabotage Clinton and fundraise like giddy televangelists.

Benghazi hearing chairman Darrell Issa, R-California, said Clinton is not a target of his committee. That doesn't seem to jibe with statements by GOP Sens. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, among others. And further contradicting Issa's protestation, the National Republican Congressional Committee was boasting that its Clinton/Benghazi fundraising page was the most successful in its history.

Benghazi is a rather unseemly subject to turn into a political weapon. It's one thing to try to drag the former secretary of state through the mud. But the Republicans are trying to drag her through blood -- blood that's tainted with partisan politics. The Republicans cut the funding for embassy security by $128 million in 2011 and $331 million in 2012. Clinton warned that doing so would be "detrimental to national security." Republicans scoffed then, scream now.

White House releases Benghazi e-mails

Just Watched

An American eyewitness in Benghazi

Obama called the Benghazi hearing a circus. He's right. It's not a transparent, due process hearing. Democrats have complained they were excluded from much of the investigations, weren't allowed to call witnesses or to look at documents.

As Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland and ranking member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, said Wednesday after the White House's release of approximately 100 pages of e-mails relating to the attacks in Benghazi: "These documents undercut the reckless accusations by Republicans that the White House scrubbed the Benghazi talking points for political reasons and in fact show just the opposite—that the primary goal was to protect the FBI's ongoing criminal investigation and our nation's intelligence operations."

A transparent, due-process hearing would call the witnesses who would testify that the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli mistakenly believed Katibat Ansar al-Sharia in Benghazi had claimed credit for the attack. The group didn't make the claim and later denied any role. But that was an on-the-ground, in-the-moment embassy mistake. (While no friend of the United States, the Benghazi al-Sharia organization has not, so far, been implicated in terrorist activity.)

Hicks clearly was referring to the Benghazi al Sharia when he testified about his concern that Ambassador Chris Stevens was taken to the hospital that the Benghazi group then guarded. But, this week the same hospital was bombed; the rival al-Shaira group in Derna, with al Qaeda links, is a reasonable suspect.

Getting the facts right matters. Getting the truth matters. Posturing for propaganda points not only misleads us, it endangers us. For whatever the Benghazi hearings are about, they're not about learning the lessons from this tragedy and improving securities at American embassies and other facilities overseas.

They are, in fact, a partisan campaign fundraiser for the Republican Party, and not a fact-finding inquiry to help the State Department and military correct their mistakes.

Karl Rove's American Crossroads super PAC has already taken on Hillary Clinton, spending megabucks on a 2016 attack ad that savages her judgments. Some Republicans, to their credit, can't stomach any more from their fellow Republicans.

Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, a Republican, appeared on CBS' "Face the Nation" and said he would have handled Benghazi just as Obama handled it. He added a flat, "No" that he did not think Hillary Clinton would be involved in any kind of a cover-up.

Bill Kristol, conservative editor and commentator, told Fox News Sunday, "I wish the Republicans would just be quiet for a while and that the partisan Republican groups that are fundraising off this would be quiet ... for a while ... and let's find out what really happened."